Learning The Constitution | 2nd Amendment Part 1

➡ On July 8th, Ron Partain discussed the Second Amendment on the Unity Channel. He explained that the Second Amendment, part of the Bill of Rights, was not included in the original Constitution but was added later. The Federalist Papers, written to convince New York to ratify the Constitution, discussed the power of the militia but not the Second Amendment specifically. The Bill of Rights, including the Second Amendment, was ratified in 1791, two years after the Constitution went into effect.
➡ The British were not heavily involved in the daily life of the American colonies until the French Indian Wars. After the war, Britain began taxing the colonies, using the war expenses as an excuse, but the colonists saw this as Britain treating them as a revenue source. The colonists, aware of their British history and rights, demanded a Bill of Rights to protect themselves from potential government tyranny. The American Revolution was not just a spontaneous uprising for liberty, but a carefully planned event by the colonists who were well aware of their rights and the potential for government overreach.
➡ The original 13th Amendment disappeared around the Civil War, with copies being destroyed. However, some copies were found in unexpected places, like tucked inside a journal. The article also discusses the possibility of amending or repealing the Bill of Rights, using the example of the 18th and 21st Amendments, which cancel each other out. Lastly, it delves into the language of the Second Amendment, emphasizing that the right to bear arms is not just for hunting or home protection, but also to defend against tyranny.
➡ The speaker discusses the Second Amendment, arguing that it was designed to allow citizens to defend themselves and their communities against government tyranny. They believe that citizens should have access to weapons equal or superior to those of the government, excluding weapons of mass destruction. The speaker also criticizes federal gun laws, suggesting that such decisions should be made at the state level. They share their reimagined version of the Second Amendment, emphasizing the right of the people to bear arms.
➡ The text discusses a book called “Patriots” by James Wesley Rawls, which presents a series of hypothetical amendments to the U.S. Constitution. These amendments include changes to citizenship laws, banning welfare and foreign aid, limiting federal spending, and reinstating a decentralized militia system. The book also explores the idea of a financial collapse and its aftermath. The text also mentions other writing projects and ideas, including a book about Donald Trump and a history series.
➡ The text discusses the role of the parliamentarian in the United States government, which was established to help manage disagreements within political parties. It also talks about the National Firearms Act (NFA) and how it was not removed but had its tax portion taken out for certain items, which some argue affects its constitutionality. The text further explores the difference between federal and state authority over gun rights, suggesting that while the federal government cannot infringe on these rights, states can pass laws to regulate them. Lastly, it dismisses the idea that the USA is a corporation and emphasizes the importance of adhering to the original intent of the Constitution.
➡ In 1939, a case involving a man named Miller reached the Supreme Court, but Miller had passed away and his lawyer didn’t attend the hearing, resulting in a ruling in favor of the government. The speaker discusses the importance of understanding the separation of powers and the roles of different branches of government. They also express their belief that the Federal Reserve System needs to be abolished, and warn of potential economic consequences if the dollar ceases to be the world’s reserve currency. The speaker also shares some personal anecdotes about their pets and local wildlife.
➡ The speaker discusses their belief that the current form of the dollar, as a debt instrument, needs to change. They suggest that the dollar should be backed by something tangible like gold, silver, or a mix of commodities. They also mention a free PDF book about the end of the Federal Reserve and discuss the history and meaning of the song “Yankee Doodle.” The speaker expresses a desire to connect with listeners and shares some trivia about a misspelling on the Declaration of Independence.
➡ The text is a casual conversation between friends, discussing various topics such as a unique signature on a document, their experiences on a ship, playing Jeopardy and Risk, their past body weights, and their upcoming radio shows. They also talk about a kitten and their preferences for dogs or cats. The conversation ends with one of them preparing to discuss how the Great Depression and the Civil Rights Act affected white and black Americans respectively.

All righty everybody. Welcome to the Unity Channel. Ron Partain. It is Tuesday 8th July, and it is time to learn the Constitution. But specifically, probably everybody’s favorite subject, Second Amendment. The Second Amendment is an extraordinarily hot topic when it comes to the Constitution. You have your, you have your absolutist absolutists on one side and your, you know, your fear mongers on the other. So. But anyway, we’re gonna go, we’re gonna delve into what the Constitution says about the Second Amendment. Was there any bit of history and stuff like that too? Yeah, is there any, is there any information talking about in the Federalist Papers or the anti Federalist Papers about the second Amendment? No, because the second amendment had not been written yet.

It hadn’t? No, no. Remember Federalist Papers about the first seven articles? Ah, okay. Now that said the power, the power of the militia was talked about in Federals paper number 29. And really 29, 30 kind of got into the militias and the militias were about the people being armed. And I, I believe also number 46, there’s some language. But yeah, the Second Amendment wasn’t around yet. Federal papers were written after in 1787, 1788, when the Constitution had been completed and it was going out to the states for ratification. And those papers were to convince New York specifically to ratify the first seven articles.

Okay, so the Constitution, that was the Constitution that went out. Because this is actually, I, I didn’t know this. Yeah, is not a part of it. Okay, so the Bill of Rights was after they ratified the Constitution. Right. These are amendments, first 10amendments. And so when, so remember, Constitution was written in 1787, 1788, it finally got fully ratified. 1789, March of 1789. It, it basically the federal government began. So it went into effect. And one of the first things that Congress did is they put out the message to the states. All right, you guys demanded a bill of rights.

We said, we, we promise you a bill of rights. Send in your ideas. And they got over a hundred, over a hundred messages, ideas, proposed amendments, proposals from the states. And then through those over a hundred, they, they whittled it down to 14 because a lot of them were, you know, redundant and all sort of stuff. And some of them weren’t necessary to have their own Amendment. So the Ninth Amendment covers it, but they got it down to 14. Then they, then the, the committee that was working on it, then the committee presented it to Congress to that, I believe it was the House first, the 14.

And both houses of Congress approved 12 of them and then those 12 went after the states of ratification and 10 got ratified and became the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights are amendments. They are after the first seven articles after the Constitution. And understand during the Constitutional Convention, there were three guys who refused to sign it who had been there the whole time. George Mason, C. Eldridge Gary and Edmund Randolph, I believe was. Is that who it was? I believe there was three. Three. And I know for sure. George Mason, he kind of led the anti Federals.

The anti Federalist basically said, this Constitution makes the government too big. We don’t trust this new government, but we’ll be willing to ratify it. We’ll be, if you promise us a Bill of Rights. So during the ratification debates, there was a promise that there would be a Bill of Rights. And that’s why Congress, once it first went into place, once the Constitution went into effect, immediately began working on it. And then. So in 1791, those 10amendments were ratified two years after Congress first took their seats. And that’s the reason why when you see the Second Amendment hat, it says established 1791 on the hat or something like that.

There you go. Okay, I’m learning. Well, I’m sure there’s a lot of folks in the audience that didn’t know that little quick little history. So the Second Amendment and the Second Amendment understand it’s a part of the Bill of rights. There’s 10 of them. And the. I wish they would have used this language over and over and over, but the Founding Fathers had a habit not to do this. If you Remember in Article 1, Section 8, Congress shall have the power to. And then they don’t repeat, Congress shall power over and over. Just two. They did kind of the same thing with the amendments.

Amendment one begins, congress shall make no law. Really? That applies to all of those Bill of Right Amendments. I wish they would have used that language over and over and over. Because if they would have been, at the beginning of the Second Amendment, began it the way it’s supposed to, Congress shall make no law. There wouldn’t be the confusion that there is. Right? But anyway, so. But yeah, it was. It was promised during ratification of the Constitution, but it did not exist. The Federalist Papers, while they did address the militias, did. They did address that we need to be armed for the purpose of the militia.

And you could go into the, you can go into the Articles of Confederation to see what they had to say. I think the language in the Articles Confederation is a little bit. A little bit better written. I don’t have it in front of me. I was trying to do this. Let me do this here because I wanted to. I wanted to play with this anyway. I wanted to play with this anyway. So let’s. I’m going to remove this from here. All right. So let’s have a little fun with some. With some chat. GPT Just for a second here.

And you are typing away like a madman. Yeah, I’m. Well, I’m looking something up here. All right, so let’s see. Okay, here we go. I found. I found the language. So it’s the Articles Confederation. Here’s what it says. Every state shall always keep up a well regulated and disciplined militia, sufficiently armed and cultured. And then there’s other language. Where, let’s see here. You gotta find it. But there’s other language also. It says that, you know, the people are the militia and need to be well armed. There you go. So this is the size of. What did the Articles Confederation say about firearms? The Articles Confederation ratified in 1781 do not directly mention firearms nor the right to bear in any explicit way.

However, they do contain language related to militia’s defense and the responsibilities of the states and Congress regarding armed forces. Article 4 section or Article 4, excuse me. Article 6, clause 4. Every state shall always keep a well regulated and disciplined militia sufficiently armed and countered. This clause requires each state to maintain its own militia. While it does not mention individual gun ownership, it presumes a populace capable of being armed and ready to serve, which historically implied that men would possess their own firearms or have access to them to the federal authority over military. Article 9, clause 4.

Congress has the power to appoint a commander in chief of the army or navy or any of the forces. But Congress could not keep a standing army in peacetime without the consent of nine states. Again indicating that the militias, not a federal army, were the primary defense mechanism and those militias were drawn from the armed citizenry. So in summary, the Articles do not establish individual rights such as right to bear, but they do presume the existence of armed citizens through the reliance on stat on state militias. So anyway, that is that and founding fathers have a lot of quotes about being armed and having arms to be that the body of citizens.

In fact, Hamilton, getting back to federalist29 wrote let’s see it. It will be possible to have an excellent body of well trained militia ready to take the field whenever the defense of the state shall require it. This will not only lessen the call for military establishments, but but if circumstances should at any time oblige the Government to form an army of any magnitude. That army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow citizens.

This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army and the best possible security against it if it should exist. In other words, have a militia, make sure they’re armed. Is the, is the best protection against a standing army is what he was saying in federal 29th. So once again this stuff was talked about and during the Constitutional Convention the militia and being armed was talked about. But the actual second Amendment, while like I said there it borrows some language from the Articles Confederation and I think the Articles Federation language is slightly better.

It didn’t appear in the Constitution until it was ratified as an amendment in 1781. Gotcha. I think. Are you familiar with Dr. Joyce Malcolm? Yes. Matter of fact, you and I have talked about her before. Yeah, I, well, I thought that we had. I just wanted to, I just wanted to, to clarify. My understanding is, is that she was, she talked about how the British were not really in, they weren’t really involved in the day to day colonial life of, of the Americas until the span, until the French Indian Wars. Right. And then that’s what they didn’t, they never really taxed them or anything.

I mean they did, they taxed goods when they were being sent to market and there were some minor taxes, basic taxes, but the colonists didn’t mind because these were taxes that the English in Britain were paying also. So it, so as far as, as far as the Englishmen in the colonies were concerned, they should be treated no different than the Englishmen in Britain. And essentially that was the case. But once the French and Indian war had, had happened and Britain decided to use the excuse, well, we spent all this money to protect you. You need to now pay us back.

But really what was going on is also they were beginning to see colonies as nothing more than a revenue source. That paying back the war was just the excuse they used. And the found and, and the, the colonists weren’t dumb. They, they knew exactly what was going on. You know, it’s, it’s. I’m glad you said that because, you know, not that people think that the, that the colonists were stupid, but I, I, you know, it takes a certain type of fortitude to, you know, live in an area like that, like, like the Eastern Seaboard that was, you know, it’s it’s not.

I mean, you know, people, people have this idea that the United States as it is today is how it was, you know. Yeah, it was 250 years ago, developing country. It was a third world country. Yeah. I mean, you, it was like, like Hudson shacks. I mean, it wasn’t pretty much. Yeah, I mean, I mean, a state. And you had your, your classes, you had your educated, wealthy, almost aristocracy class. Right. And you had your peasants and everything else. But the thing is about America, one thing that people later on would notice is even, even those who did not know how to read and write knew civics.

They knew their constitution once it was in place. Americans, you know, made sure they knew this. But you got to remember, because they’re Englishmen, the, the history of Britain is, is their history. So that’s why they knew they needed a Bill of Rights, because the Declaration of Rights of 1689, after the Glorious Revolution, which declared that the subjects would have arms for their defense suitable to their condition as a law by law. In other words, because what was happening is the monarchy had basically said that what the King says goes, and he’s not, and he doesn’t care anymore what the Parliament has to say.

And he had his own people in the Parliament. Everybody’s like, no Parliament is supposed to be our voice. And the King is subject to that voice. Right. The constitutional monarchy is what they called it. And so out of the Glorious Revolution and out of the Declaration of Rights came this Parliament regaining its footing as the voice of the people and limiting the monarch. And, you know, because there was friction over the English Crown’s effort to, to try to use loyal militias to try to control and disarm dissidents and enhance the Crown standing army. And so, and so what the people.

This is. Okay, we’re not put up with this. So they replaced King James with William and Mary, Mary being James’s daughter, who was, you know, you know, who, who was more about the people. And the Parliament being the voice of the people and all that. And the William of Orange, and he was actually Dutch. But. And so this was their history. They knew this. And so when it was, people say, well, how did they know they won a Bill of Rights? Because they were British, they were English, and, and they’re referring to the English Declaration of rights of 1689, say, hey, we need one of those.

We need one of those documents because government can be tyrannical and we need to make sure there is something that declares what our rights are. Now understand, the Bill of Rights does not give the rights it declares, enumerates those rights to remind government, by the way, these rights exist. Don’t touch them. They belong to the people. It’s our possession. Right? And so, and the Declaration of Independence, you know, among its grievances against King George iii, you know, also kind of, you know, went along this line where he, you know, where the language in the, in the Declaration of Independence, you know, accused King George of, of keeping soldiers among us and trying to take our arms from us without our consent and without consent of our legislatures.

And this codified this arms bearing rights kind of idea. And remember, the war began, Lexington and Concord, and this is a year before the Constitution. I’m sorry, the Declaration of Independence was written. What Lexington, Concord was partly about. Lexington was about the British searching for Hancock and, and, and Samuel Adams and, and Concord was all about the British going there to seize the largest stash of arms and, and ammunition that the colonists had. Because basically Crown was like, well, these guys are getting so uppity. We better take their arms away from them before they start shooting at us.

And that was like the last straw. So you’re gonna do what? Let me. Are you familiar with the work of, of James Perlo? Okay, so I, I have a lot of respect for James Perloff. Okay? He is, he, he says. And it’s kind of very. It’s, it’s, it’s, it’s, it’s somewhat controversial, but he actually talks about how the, the, the rebellion. Oh, I’ve got one of Perloff’s books, the Shadows of Power. But anyway. Go ahead. Yeah, exactly. So he talks about how the rebellion was essentially a. It was, it was manufactured by the colony, by the people up there in, by the elites up in, up in Boston.

They manufactured it because they wanted a separation. Right? And he. Who was it that I. Where did I read this? That the, the, the, the Indians that went aboard the ship to dump all the tea into the harbor were actually just dressed up, pulled Right. Freemasons. Well, they were. I don’t know about the Freemasons part, but they were colonists who were like, basically they, they dressed up as Indians. Everybody knew it was them. They weren’t pulling anybody. They dressed up as, as Mohawks, basically. Gotcha. And, and, and here’s the thing about them, though. When they went on those ships, they dumped the tea.

They had to break one of the locks to get into it. Later on, one of them came back to fix the lock. They didn’t want to create any damage, and they were told, don’t do any. Just put the tea in the harbor, no damage, no violence. You know, this was meant to be just a signal. But. And of course the response from the Boston Tea Party was the, you know, shut down the Boston Harbor. No more goods come in and out of Boston Harbor. They shut it down. The British did, among other things. It was pretty severe.

And this is so I just kind of just did a summary as like this is, this is what, this is what Berloff contends. Okay. And I’m not saying that this is what happened. I’m just saying this is his contention, okay. That he said that the Perloff sees the American Revolution not as a spontaneous uprising for liberty, but as a deliberately orchestrated event. A kind of false flag operation driven by secretive elites with long term agendas. He writes that like so many word it that way, but it’s essentially correct. Right. He writes that so many American wars, the Revolution was fought under contrived justification, suggesting that the perceived outrage against British rule was engineered to manufacture consent for war and that the Declaration was authorized.

Authorized or authored by Thomas Paine Jefferson. Now I’ve heard that as well and I’m not trying to get, I don’t want to get too far off. There is evidence that Thomas Paine may have approved it or had a say in it because when they found Sherman’s copy of the decoration, Thomas Paine’s initials were on it as well. So it is believed that Sherman shared it with pain for him to take a look, see what he thought. Jefferson wrote it. There’s no doubt in anybody’s mind. And then Adams wrote copies of Jefferson. So he made it legible because, because it’s just doing his thing.

And then Adams took it and made it look nice. And then he, and he made four of them. One for himself, one for Franklin, one for Sherman, one for Livingston. I’m. I’m sorry, five of them and then one for Jefferson. They gave back to him. Gave him. But Jefferson had his own original. But like I said, Sherman’s copy vanished. Everybody’s got Jefferson’s copies and Adams copies. Well, okay, copy disappeared till about 10 years ago. You speak a lot. You speak about vanishing. I’m absolutely of the opinion that the, the original 13th Amendment vanished around the Civil War.

That that was one of the things that, that Lincoln did was he sent troops to every single courthouse everywhere in the north and in the south, but everywhere to find any copies that they could of the, of the Constitution and get rid of them perhaps. And. But there were state. There were some books that still had it, which they found. But the thing is about all that, we also have to remember that during the War of 1812, the Library Congress and the White House were torched. And so a lot of these original documents were gone. That’s what everybody thought had happened to that Sherman’s copy.

Anyway. So when Sherman’s copy was found, Sherman’s copy was tucked inside a journal originally. And then it wound up tucked inside. What was it? A. It was a funeral notice something journal for a particular brigadier journal from that time period. And, and it just never got noticed that it was tucked in there until about 10 years ago down in Georgia. They were going through some old documents and found this sheet tucked inside this, opened it up, did the research, turned out to be Sherman’s copy. Wasn’t there somebody like not too long ago who bought a. Maybe this is probably 15, 20 years ago, some gu.

Bought a. He bought a picture frame or something and there was an original copy of the Declaration in there. Yeah, that one was one of the copies that had gone to Britain. Yeah. If you remember the story. Yeah. And it was like, it was like he bought, he bought this thing for like 50 cents or something. A frame for 50 cents. And it had an original copy of the. Well, to tell a side story, just to show how this can happen. My, my favorite baseball card that I own is a 1956 Hires Root Beer card of Mickey Mantle.

I had bought a. I had bought a, a binder full of cards from like the 90s for like 20 bucks at a garage sale or estate sale or something like that. When I was examining them, slipped inside the sleeve of the, the front cover was that Mickey Mantle card. You never know. So that goes back to this. So that goes now back to this. There, the documents. There’s probably a lot of copies still out there. We just haven’t. Right. Or, or they’ve been tossed because people didn’t know that they existed and they were in their hiding place.

So. Yeah, well, getting back kind of to the second Amendment here, first of all, let’s, let’s, let’s address Tackleberry’s question. Can the Bill of Rights be amended, repealed or otherwise altered? And in, in a way, I believe that they can through the amendment process. Amendment process, exactly. But understand, just like we can repeal the 17th amendment with another amendment, but if you’ve got three quarters of the states ratifying something that would, let’s say, get rid of the second Amendment, we got bigger problems than. Yeah, yeah. Well, I mean, I mean, if you, if you need any example of an amendment being repealed.

All you got to do is look at the 18th, right? Prohibition, 18th and 21st. 21st repeals the 18th. Yeah. So yes, that’s the reason why when someone says, oh, how many amendments are there in the Constitution? You say, well, the number says 27, but actually it’s 25. Because 18 and 21st cancel each other out. Right, That’s a good point. I never really thought about it from that perspective, but you’re right. Well, so, I mean, everybody pretty much knows. Let’s just look up the language of the second amendment real quick. Just so that we have it on the.

Yeah, and, and the left plays with language. The left does these things. We see it all the time with Trump’s presidency. How many times have we seen someone in Trump’s team says something and then they’ll say they said something different or take it out of context. This, this language is, is no different. The founding fathers understood that that kind of stuff was going on, but at the same time they wanted to be as brief but yet precise as possible. They, they believed this was adequate. A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state.

The right of the people to keep them bear arms shall not be infringed. Now, the main reason for the people to be armed is not so you can go hunting, not so you can protect your house, is to defend your state or your community against tyranny. That’s the reason why they began with a well regulated militia. A militia that’s in good order, in other words, is necessary to protect your state from tyranny. That’s the primary reason to be armed. That’s what it’s saying. Part of the problem with that language is because it begins a well regulated militia, you then have the argument from opponents saying, well, so it’s a collective right.

You can’t own a gun unless you are part of that militia. And now since we don’t have militias, that means national guard, police. That’s what these opponents will tell you. But that’s the reason why they made sure they also put the words in there. The right of the people to show it is an individual right. That’s the language. You got to take it in context of time period, what was going on too well. And see, that’s another thing that people just don’t understand. In fact, I wanted to. Let me, I gotta find this document here because you know why.

But I’m not going to. Where is it? There it is. See if I can pull this over here. Yarn Addict. By the way, While you’re, you’re going. Many of the guns were stolen from the Brits. Ha. That’s true. Yes, they were. As well as cannons. Yeah. So we didn’t have, we didn’t have very many cannons. Well, no, in fact, during the war or. We stole them. Yeah. I mean, the one, and so the ones that, the ones that we liberated Boston with were actually stolen from Fort Ticonderoga. Right. So which is one of the main reasons why, you know, that’s, that’s, that’s kind of a big deal.

You know that the Fort, Fort Ticonderoga thing is kind of a big deal. So this right here is a, this right here is an amicus brief that was filed in a case I think it’s in at the 7th Circuit. And let me do, let me just do some searching in here. Let’s see. Pumpkin. Why does this look familiar? I, I, I, I, I’m not sure I’m familiar, but yet it, there’s something here that looks familiar with this case name. Let’s see. See. Okay, so this is, okay, so let me, I’ll go up to the top again.

You can see for yourself. It’s for the United States Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, Caleb Barnett et al. Plaintiffs vs. Kwame Rule Attorney General of the State of Illinois at all. So basically what they’re doing is the act violates the Second Amendment by banning AR15s and other firearms that are in common use by law abiding citizens. Text history and precedent confirms that a legislature may not ban a class of weapon. So these are, these are the, this is the, the, the amicus brief that was filed. It’s a, it’s 34 pages. And let me go to the next.

So right here at sites number seven, which is this or case right here. Indeed, every 19th century court and legal treaties writer to consider the question understood that arms useful for militia service fell within the very core of the right. Bara Eluda Subra and not even the most restrictive courts debated whether rifles and muskets designed for military use fell within the arms protected by the right to keep and bear arms. On this question, the law was unanimously understood. So I mean, so I mean they’re talking about 19th century law. So during the 1800s that it was absolutely understood.

Second, modern Second Amendment precedent confirms that while weapons for the common defense are not the only weapons protected by the second amendment, they nonetheless remain protected if they meet the rest of Heller’s test, that is if they are in common use by law abiding citizens for Lawful reasons. For example, in a recent decision decided after Beavis, the D.C. court grappled with the issue and rejected the idea that the second amendment protected the non. The second amendment protection does not extend to weapons that are most useful in the military context. Now it kind of goes down in here and I mean this is all legal stuff but such arms are commonly kept.

This is the, I guess this is Duke 42 Texas from 1875. Such arms are commonly kept according to the customs of the people and are appropriate for open and manly use of. In self defense as well as such are proper for the defense of the state. So essentially what they’re saying here is that back then they recognized that the defense of the state was also a primary reason to keep the, you know, for, for people to have weapons that essentially were identical to that of military arms. Right. And the language is almost contradictory because what they’re getting into, they you and the term when it comes to guns.

Common use is a modern creation. Founding fathers, when they created the second amendment they talked about it and it was all about the militias. And let’s just use a little common sense here. I know that’s shocking. Common sense. If the goal of the second amendment is to make sure that you are armed in a manner that can defend your community against government tyranny, what level of weaponry would be required? The level of weaponry required is what they have the enemy. So the second Amendment, if the purpose is, is for to protect your community, your state from the tyranny of the government, then the second amendment is saying your right to keep and bear arms includes every weapon that is equal or greater than, equal to or greater than that of the government.

So for them to say oh well you can’t have this because that’s a military star. What, what’s the purpose? To defend military style. That’s what I need. So, so what we’ve allowed them to do though is use feelings and with and their little narrative to get convince us, well, you don’t need that. You don’t need that. The founding fathers would be very angry if they knew before they were gone that what would happen. And some of them suggested this could happen, that the military has say rapid fire automatic firearms, but the citizenry cannot. Right. For example, once again it’s.

And once again also we have to remember it’s an individual right. You have an individual right to defend yourself and your community against government tyranny. And it’s funny how people change their mind depending on who’s in power about what they think of the Second Amendment, great example. I was real quick, if you don’t mind a minute. I’m speaking at ucr, University of California, Riverside. And I thought, I thought I had finally arrived. It was the third time I spoke to the College Republicans there, and the third time I, I spoke there, Antifa was there to protest me.

I’d arrived. You know, you’re doing well when you’re pissing off groups like that, right? And they know, and they know who you are. I’m like, man, I’ve arrived. This is awesome, right? I’ve got these idiots all over the place. And, and so four of the College Republicans surround me and escort me up the stairs through this crowd that’s lining both sides of the street stairs. And one of them is spitting and screaming at me and has a, and has a, a shirt says, Trump is a fascist. And I couldn’t let it go, so I stopped. Trump’s a fascist.

Do you even know what a fascist is? Says, yeah, and he comes up with some. I said, no, that’s not what a fascist is. Look it up, man. You’re probably, you’re probably for gun control too, aren’t you? And the guy’s like, yeah, we got to protect our children, blah, blah, blah. So, so you agree that the only people that should have firearms is Trump’s government, right? Oh, he didn’t know how to respond. And then me and the four young men continued up the stairs. But, but, but my, my, my, my point is this right to keep bare arms sure shifts your, your attitude towards it sure shifts depending on who’s in office.

That’s a man. That’s a, that is, that is awesome. That is, that, that’s, that’s fantastic. Actually, I’m trying to find something here that I did, and I, I don’t remember where I put it. I wonder if I put it up here. I, I think I, I told you not too long ago that I, I, I was just having a little bit of fun. And, and I, I, I was, I, I rewrote the, the Second Amendment. You remember that? Yeah, I remember that. I thought you put you. I was just having a little fun. I almost sound like Rush having so much fun.

It shouldn’t be legal. I know, right? I, I want to, I want to try to find where I, it’s, it’s, it’s so difficult to, to find it in here, but I think there needs to be a lot more emphasis on the right of the people. Right? I think this is it right here. I, I think I found it. Okay, so this is. Now I’m going to share this and I’m, I’m going to share this screen because this is actually something that I’m working on. I’m actually supposed to, I was, I was supposed to have sent this to you a long time ago and I haven’t because this is the project that I wanted to work on with you.

But this was my rewriting of the second Amendment. A well armed citizenry being the final check against tyranny, foreign invasion and bureaucratic despotism. The right of the people to keep and bear arms of equal or superior capacity to those possessed by agents of the state shall not be questioned, taxed, tracked, licensed, restricted or infringed. Oh, I like that. And it ties into a lot what we’ve already said. Capacity shall be defined as including the functionality, capability of arms, whether semi automatic, fully automatic, energy based, cyber, electronic or weapon systems yet to be invented, suitable for lawful self defense, community defense or national defense.

In the event of government collapse or foreign aggression, any arm not capable of mass indiscriminate destruction shall be considered constitutionally protected for civilian ownership. The only exception would be weapons for mass destruction. Specifically nuclear, biological, chemical or radiological, may be constitutionally restricted due to their indiscriminate extinction level potential. Such arms due to their scale are considered beyond the scope of individual defense and incompatible with the rights of a free society. All other arms, regardless of classification, function or intimidation by regular regulatory terminology, are the rightful property of free citizens. So that was, that was funny because when I talk about the second amendment you can always tell when the lefties there because you talk about that when I say that the firearms or the weaponry that someone possesses should be as, as great or greater than that, that is against them.

And usually the lefties the first words out of the mouth. Oh, so the average should be able to have a nuclear bomb. Right. And, and so, and you address that and my first response is well, first of all, the shall not be infringed and the preamble to the Bill of Rights is about the federal government. Congress shall make no law. Right, the federal government can’t keep you from having nuclear bomb, but unless it’s a national security issue. But your state can pass that law. Yeah, but that’s a whole different discussion for later. But the thing is the key here is that because it really is Congress shall make no law.

What that says. I want everybody to sit down for this. I want you to understand this. That means that every single federal gun law direct or indirectly related to your right to keep mirror arms is unconstitutional, background checks included. And of course, then the lefties go, oh, so you don’t think there should be background checks? I don’t know. I haven’t really thought about it far enough. No, personally, I don’t think so. But if a state wants to let that state make that decision, but for the federal government be doing it, none of their business. Right. Their job is not our lives.

Agreed. Their job is the external stuff. The union. That’s what the federal government was created for. Our lives. That’s local. None of your business. Absolutely. I wholeheartedly agree. There’s a. There’s a. A very good book out there by James Wesley Rawls. Have you ever heard of him? And I even have the book. Go ahead and say it. It’s called Patriots. Yeah, I think I do have it. Yeah. I tell you, another good book about this subject too is this one right here, Second Amendment Primer. Les Adams. Where is that doggone book? Okay, now that’s really strange.

And I believe I’ve got. I’m. I’m pretty sure I have that book. Almost positive. Okay. I don’t know why it’s. It’s doing this on me, but it is it. But I’ll fix it. The. Because I want to open it. I want to open this book up and go to the specific page where it talks about it. Because at the end, if you, if you guys have ever read Patriots, it’s actually a really, really good book. James Wesley Rawls was a. He was in the army and he was in intelligence, and he made a. He basically took all of the army manuals for survival and put Rose story about the collapse of the country based on an.

On an economic collapse. And ironically, the, you know, you know, the number that he used for the. The economy breaking down, I think it was like the national debt was like at like 2029 or 28, 23 or $29 trillion or something like that, and we’ve far surpassed that. So it’s just the first book I was looking at the books I have. I’ve got two of them. The first book which I’ve read is Survivors. I read by. By Rawls. I read that one. I haven’t read Patriots yet. I have it. It’s a. It’s. It’s a very good book.

Very, very good book. He at the tail end. What he does is he writes several different. I’m trying to find it here. So. Okay, here it is. I’m right on the page that he did it. Okay, so let me Go ahead and share this. Instead, let me make this. This a little bit bigger. Okay, so this is the book patriots and this. Keep in mind this is coming from a guy who is. Who. Who was. He was military. He said the 28th Amendment repealed the 14th and 26th Amendments. It also made full, full state citizenship, a right of birth only applicable to native born citizens who were children of citizens.

It allowed immigrants to buy state citizenship. It clarified United States citizenship only having effect when the state citizens traveled outside the nation’s borders and outlawed titles of nobility such as Esquire. The 29th Amendment banned welfare and foreign aid, removed the United States from the United nations and most foreign states and Most foreign treaties cats federal spending at 2% of GDP, cap the combined number of foreign troops in the 50 states and on federal territory at 1, 000 men and limited the active duty federal person military to. To a hundred thousand men. This was federal spending at 2%.

Hasn’t happened since before the war between the states. I remember doing a study one time in the 1890s. It was 3 to 4% of GDP. He’s talking even lower than that. Yeah, the. The 30th Amendment amplified the second, confirming it as both an unalienable individual right and as a state right, repealed the existing federal gun control laws, preempted any present or future gun or state gun control laws, and reinstituted a decentralized militia system. So, and then if you. I mean just since we’re here. The 31st Amendment repealed the 16th Amendment and severely limited the ability of the federal government to collect any taxes within the 50 states.

32nd outlawed deficit spending. The 33rd froze salaries at $6,000 a year for House members and 10,000 for senators. Let’s see. 34th restored the pre Erie railroad versus Tompkins system of common law, invalidated most federal court decisions since 1932 and clarified the in. Now I’m curious. Why did he say before 1932? Good question. Since 35 was the NFA right? Yeah, 34, but 30. But 32 is when FDR came into office. Right. And that was when he threatened the. Well, that’s when he won the election. He actually didn’t come in office till 33. I. I get that, but.

But he misses since 1932 and I’m guessing that that has something. Has to. There’s obviously a reason that he chose that date. The 35th Amendment reinstated the allodial land title system under a renewed federal land patent system. And the amendment mandated the return of 92% of the federal lands to Private ownership through public sales at $1 in silver per coin per acre. So this should give you an idea of Mr. James Wesley Rawls mindset. So they were asking in the chat room about the name of the book again. Oh, you know what? I’m sorry, guys. I thought I, I thought I was showing it on.

On here, and I didn’t. Forgive me. It’s Patriots by James Wesley Rawls. Yeah, trying to find the. Where the. Like I said, survivors is the one I’ve read. Yeah. So here it is and let me, Let me shrink it down. So Patriots, a novel of the survival of the coming collapse. And it’s actually. It’s actually a pretty good book. He’s. He’s written. He’s written quite a few. So. But that’s a. That’s actually a fantastic book. And there. And all of the books that he’s written, they all tell, they all. It’s all. All revolved around. Around the exact same story, which is about, you know, about this particular event of the financial collapse.

One of them is a. A guy who’s like, in the military in like Europe or whatever, and he has to make his way back across the ocean. And then he finds a trip. He find. He finds some. Finds a way to. Again, he has a bicycle and he, he rides up to some port or something and then he, he finds a. A ship that’s going across the ocean and he. It’s the only thing getting into the. To the Western Hemisphere and it takes him down to South America. And then he has to like, get a horse or a bike or something and ride up all the way through the folding.

You know, I have a fiction book I wrote that that’s sort of similar in the sense that the two people are trying to get to North America from Europe, but they, in their case, they wind up catching a ride with a submarine, American submarine, military submarine, which was shielded from the electrical geomagnetic storm. Interesting. But. But. But anyway, the. It’s just. It’s just. It’s just interesting to see. You know, I mean, all, all of the books basically revolve around that. The center story of the. Of. Of the financial collapse. And anyway, it’s, It’s. It’s a great series.

It’s a great series. It’s. It’s actually pretty long, but it’s. And. But it’s, It’s. It’s a. It’s a really good read. It’s a really good read. Special ed, you’ll be one of the first to know once part two of my History series comes out. The, the. The good news is I’m working on it. The, the bad news is I don’t work on it all the time because I have other ideas too. And what might come out before part two of the history book is a book I’m writing called Donald J. Trump versus the World. I like that.

Yeah. In fact, my cover that I created, it has Trump with a lightsaber. Oh, nice. I got the idea from Scott Pilgrim versus the World kind of movie. You’re not gonna, you’re not gonna put him in a, in a, in a Jedi night robe, are you? No. You should put him in a, you’re not gonna put him in a stormtrooper outfit. No, but I’ve got a couple hundred pages of that written too. So you. Both books are being worked on, but because what happens as a writer. Real quick, sorry for the side note, as special ed kind of got me on, this is especially a large project like part two of the history book, which is like a 700 page book, is you work on it, you work on it.

You go, God, I gotta take a break. Well, as a writer, the break is to work on some other project. And so what happens is sometimes my shorter books get, get written and finished before the big one gets finished. That’s kind of what’s going on. But yeah, the. And my wife, you know, often is a writer’s widow, but she’s okay with it. Well, I’ve been, I’ve been putting together. I, I have to say that, you know, I mean, they’re my ideas that I’m, I’m putting into the, into the platform and having them and having them written for me, but they’re, I mean, I’m with.

It’s at my direction, but I’ve got some pretty good stuff that I’ve written, you know, with, with my, my direction in terms of like how I want it to go. And it just saves it so much time because it fills in my ideas and concepts are, are absolutely apparent in the words, but I don’t have to just sit there and tediously hunt and peck. So. But it’s, it’s, it’s, it’s very interesting. I mean, I did, I, I’ve shared with you some of the stuff that I’ve, that I’ve done. So that’s a real special that says parts one and two are due to become documentaries.

You kidding me? Chapters will be documentaries. Yeah. Those books are so massive. The part one alone probably has 20 different documentaries in it. And talk about my, my history series. My first history, A Promise of. Well, why am I suddenly blanking on the title? A Promise of American Liberty. Well, and let’s, let’s, let’s talk a little bit about, let’s talk a little bit about the Big Beautiful bill especially. It’s a promise of true self evident. That’s it. Early America. Okay, well let’s talk about the Big Beautiful bill in reference to what we’re talking about with the Second Amendment.

Yeah. Okay, so in, in the Big Beautiful bill there. Well, what they tried to do was they tried to put in the, what they called the Hearing Protection act, which would remove silencers from the nfa. Then they also tried to put in the Short act in the Senate and both of those essentially got gutted by the parliamentarian. I wrote an article about the parliamentarian, by the way, which was absolutely, I mean it was shameful. I mean things like that, when they happen, when, when, when they happen. It really makes me question. And we talked about this last week, right.

About how the parliamentarian, I mean parliamentarian was basically stuck in there. Created. Yeah. Make sure that Franklin Dylan Roosevelt had a way to. Well, I thought it was under, I thought it was Woodrow Wilson. No, it was on fdr. What was happening real quick. I’ll keep it, I’ll keep it quick is FDR had a super majority. The problem is in his side, his own party, there were three factions and they couldn’t get any gun. So he basically had the parliamentarian created so that he got what he wanted. And we’ve had a parliamentarian ever since. There’s only been five of them.

19. Yeah, 1935. But because you had, you had conservative Democrats, you had progressive Democrats and you had the Southern Democrats and all three of them are disagreeing on. So he couldn’t get anything done even though he had a super majority. So you bring in the parliamentarian and the parliamentarians operating at the behest of the President gets things the way he wants it. The position of the parliamentarian of the United States House of Representatives was officially established in 1970. 1927. And the Senate parliamentarian position was formally created in 1935. Yeah, right. Senate Parliamentarian 35. Yeah, yeah. Now founders fathers didn’t create these positions.

They weren’t. No, they did not. I’m a firm believer it was the establishment’s way of making sure that they did what the inferior courts was doing with their universal injunctions. Same garbage, same game. Just hiding in plain sight through the parliamentarian. Tiger said to scroll up and I can’t wait for The NFA to be removed when the OBB takes effect? Well, it doesn’t actually. It doesn’t. The NFA doesn’t, isn’t removed. They tried to, but basically what happened was what they did was they took out the, they took out the tax portion of the NFA for silencers and short barrel rifles and shotguns.

Now if you go back and you look at the, what was it the 1937 case that they talked about the night. I think it was a 1937 Sikorsky or something like that. And what they did, they said that because it was a tax, it wasn’t necessarily a restriction on the second Amendment because of the tax. But what the conservatives did here on, on the House or on the floor is I think it was almost like a Trojan horse type thing where they put this, put this in where let’s just take the tax out. And the left didn’t really.

Well yeah, because the tax is the only thing that attaches it to the Constitution. It’s sort of like Obamacare. Same idea is Congress has the authority to tax. Therefore if there is a fee or a tax, well then that makes it constitutional, right? That’s the argument. But if there is no tax, the rest of it, there is no constitutional connection to any authority granted. Period. So if you remove the tax, any constitutionality at all that can be argued is gone. Yeah, 100%. Now that said, I think it should be noted that the, the Federal Constitution is, I mean we kind of, every time that Doug and I have done the second Amendment, we always start with the story of you don’t want your 12 year old to be able to go buy a gun.

That’s basically how I want to get a general feel on this one day. 100. 100. That is part of it. A variation of a variation of that. Yeah, well and, and what you’re getting at is where does the authorities lie regarding your gun rights? That’s right. And you got to understand that there is, there’s, there’s the, the, the, the, if you look at what the founding fathers created. The founding fathers created a, a constitution that was supposed to the, the Federal Constitution was only supposed to be applicable to the federal government. It was not supposed to be applicable to the states.

And in fact I think it was the 14th amendment or I think it was the McDonald decision up in Chicago where they, they basically tied the 14th Amendment to the states and, and made the. Well the 14th amendment had been being. The 14th amendment was tying the Bill of Rights to the states as early as the Slaughterhouse cases. But gun rights, while for the most part hadn’t been touched when it came to incorporation until McDonald v. Chicago, which, you know, I don’t remember the year, but McDonald Van, I think it was 2008 or 10 or something like that.

Okay, well what it was is Chicago had banned handguns and got sued for it and it made its way up to the Supreme Court. And understand this is after the, the Heller ruling. Heller ruling came first and basically said, and Heller ruling basically codified the idea that it’s an individual right, not a collective right. That’s basically what Heller said. And Heller was a Washington D.C. case. Courts had every authority to take it because it’s a federal district. But anyway, get back to McDonald. And so even Clarence Thomas, you know, ruled that. And, and, and it was a win for gun rights, ruled that Chicago couldn’t do that.

But here’s the question. Did the federal government have the authority, the federal courts have the authority even take that case. Could they dictate to a city what they can do or not do regarding your gun rights? Do they have that authority? If they don’t have any authority regarding your guns, Congress shall make no law, shall not be infringed, then, then they, they have no allowance to even be making that decision. Well, yeah, but Doug, the city was violating the second Amendment. Second Amendment does not give you your gun rights. The Second Amendment is something that tells the federal government, don’t touch your gun rights.

But your, but your rights are a local issue. And so there’s going to be at the local level certain laws regarding your rights that are necessary for your local order. Right. Orderly procession of society, so to speak. In other words, the federal constitution does, should, is not applicable and should not be. It should not tell the state and local governments what they can and cannot do with those rights. And it’s, it’s expressly why if you look at each state constitution, each state constitution has its own language in it about including guns. And, and usually the reaction I get when I say what I just said was.

And what you said. Oh, so you think that states can jump all over our rights to stop on it, right? No, I don’t think so. You’re right is your right, it’s your right. You own it, it belongs to you. But if there needs to be any laws regarding it, it has to happen at the local or state level. Yes. And then that goes back to the example you gave a moment ago. You know, I’ve got a, a 10 year old grandson and I’m happy that there’s laws that don’t allow him to walk into a gun store and just buy the gun.

Now maybe back in the 50s that would have been okay. Nowadays not so much. But the federal government can’t make that law. They’re not allowed to. Shall not be infringed. Not us. They have no say on whether or not that 10 year old can walk into a gun store and buy a gun without parental supervision. But the states can pass those laws. So this is where McDonald v. Chicago is kind of, kind of a tricky ground because the court was right that you have a right to keep bear arms and Chicago had no business interfering with your right to keep and bear arms and handguns.

But it wasn’t for the federal government to make that decision. They have no authority over gun rights whatsoever. Shall not be infringed. So therefore that decision falls on the localities who we are supposed to be on have under our control. We are supposed to be making sure they respect our rights and so on and so forth. A piece of paper doesn’t protect your right to keep and bear arms. You do. Is there a difference between the federal, what federal government can do and what USA Incorporated can do? I didn’t read that whole thing before I posted it, but I, I, well, you got to realize that neither Doug nor I subscribe to the notion that the USA is an incorporated entity.

I’ve done, I’ve done a number of shows and videos about why that and that’s actually very easy to debunk. I understand why people gravitate towards that. Yeah. Because something’s wrong and I get it and you all know something’s wrong. Agreed. And the way the country operates, way the shadow state, the dark deep state the swamp operates, it sure seems like one of those thousand corporations, but. And so it makes sense to us. But no, United States is not a corporation. That, that said, I get it. I understand but, but either way, whether it is or not, the, the, the fix is still to get back to the original intent of the Constitution.

Correct? That’s where my focus is. Right. And, and to your, and, and to your point, Ed, to your point, is there a difference between what the federal government can do with the USA corporate can do? Basically they are one in the same. The federal government cannot make any laws against the second Amendment or, or against firearms. Period, full stop. I mean none. They can’t make anything that restricts you, your ability to get it. And the way they got around it with the NFA was the tax. That was the way they got around it. And then USV Miller, Miller was the first one that was charged by it.

And sadly, in 1939, when that case ultimately got to the Supreme Court, Miller had passed away. And the, and the, the lawyer who was defending Miller was like, why the heck do I got to go to Washington? I mean, this is the 1939. It’s not like it’s easy. It’s a Washington D.C. from where I think he was in like an Arkansas or Oklahoma or something like that. I mean it was, it’s not like it was like super easy to get to Washington D.C. so he just didn’t go. And the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the government.

And there’s never been a challenge to the, to the NFA since. They’re gods. Yeah. 100. And that, and that, that’s what happens. That’s the reason why the universal injunctions being shot down was so important, because it reminded us, no, the judges aren’t these gods, what they say. They are not the final arbiters. And there is something called separation of powers. Yeah. Well, okay, so, okay, Trump is CEO of the corporation and CIC of the government. No, he’s commander in chief of the military and he’s a CEO and the, the chief executive of the executive branch. So it’s not the, I, I, I understand where you’re going with that, but that’s not the, that’s not the proper use of the terms.

And I’m, I’m not coming down on your heart. I’m just, I’m just. Ed, I love you, man, but the corporation thing out you, I’ll have to shoot you some links about what I’ve talked about. And I mean I, you know, in the end you could come to your own decision. Right. But the evidence doesn’t say what people claim the evidence says. Yeah, and, and listen, I, I, I absolutely understand why people think, feel that way. In my humble opinion, what it is, is, it’s, it’s a very, you gravitated to it for a while. I did too, yes.

I absolutely did. I absolutely did. I thought I, I, I looked into it and I had done some research and I was like, wow, this, this, this really makes a lot of sense. But it, what it really, for me, what it boiled down to was a bowl down to, you know, just after the, the, you know, the war, Northern aggression. So when I realized, when it went, you know, taking that into consideration, I was like, wow, that makes a lot of sense. But then I got to thinking, you know, but then I got to actually really analyzing it and it just, it didn’t, it didn’t hold up water.

And I think Melody Jennings wrote a pretty good book about it. Right? Yeah. So, you know, it’s pretty rough when the audience starts walking across your desk, isn’t it though? But I’ve got, I’ve got this little guy, he’s the only one, and suddenly see another body go by with a job. Little guy. I’ve got this little guy. He’s, he has, he has a, he has a little bit of an infection. So I’m just, I’m keeping him close and nursing him. But I’ve got one at my feet under my desk, the other one in his bed on the other side of my desk.

And this morning had a lot of fun. I wound up going through a lot of apples because we had some deer visit and one of them was this itty bitty little baby with still with little white spots on. Was real timid, you know, and kind of reactionary. When I was throwing apples out, the older ones were eating it and it’s running away and then it’ll come back and they’ll sniff it. Never did eat it though, because it’s a baby. It doesn’t. But. Well, I get all kinds of animal life, animal life here. They’re just not cats and if they are cats, then I want to stay indoors because the cats that show up are mountain lions.

Right. Exactly, exactly. You know, there’s, there’s a, there’s a lot of stuff going on out there. Let’s, let’s take a break from the second for a second for, for a minute and just, just talk about kind of the, the state of, the, of, of, of kind of what’s happening out there because there’s so many people that are black pilled and so many people that are turning on Trump and, and you know, there’s, I’m, I’m, I’m not hearing a lot of, there’s, there’s really not a lot of leaks out there about things that are coming or, you know, of, like, of things that are happening.

And you know, I think, I think as Americans we have, as connoisseurs and consumers of media, whether it be, you know, television, newspaper, radio, whatever. We have been programmed to think that, hey, as long as people are out there, they’re getting information and they’re putting it out so that we can kind of paint a clear picture of what’s going on. And I think what’s happening right now and what has been happening very slowly over the past, call it six or seven years is there’s been a slow, methodical sorting out of people who are guilty of leaking information.

And right now we’re not getting much information. And the fact that we’re not getting much information. Oh, wait, wait. So what. What booklet? What are you talking about? Am I. Am I missing something here in the chat room? There’s been. I. I am not exactly sure either. Okay. At the moment Ed started talking about the corporation, then that’s when that was the US Debt clock and all that came. That wasn’t the. That wasn’t the. The. The. Yeah, that was the usa. USA Corporation, but it wasn’t the government. It was a private entity. It was a private individual that followed for chapter 11.

US Corp. That filed chapter 11 in 2019 was a real estate company that use that name. But anyway, we’re not here to debate that issue. The. The point is that the. Where was I going? Damn it. I got my. I got totally derailed with what I was saying. What was I saying? What? He is a talker. What was that? What was I talking about a second ago? I got distracted by the chat room too. I did too. Damn it. Oh, well, the. Well, here, while you’re trying to figure it out, audience, we’re just introducing the second amendment today and talking a little bit about it.

I want to break down the language next week. I want to really nail down what well regulated militia, what being necessary to secure this free state, the right of the people. What does the word keep. What is the word? Bear? What does the word arms mean? People just think it’s firearms. There’s more to it than that, you know, and more of the history behind that language and why they used it the way they did. I want to get more into that. Those details. Yarn Addict says, by the way, the baby is cute. Yeah, he is. He’s adorable.

He really is. Yeah, I’m. I’m a doggy guy. Like I said. Sorry. I. I will say this. That big cat I was talking about, that mountain lion one time, it did walk across my deck and my dog, who’s about this big, is growling at it through the sliding glass door. And I’m like, dude, that’s not a cat you want to chase, man. Just shut up. Just be quiet. Exactly. Oh, oh. Not, not, not. Thank. Thank you, Tredar. Oh, you’re so awesome. Stuff being leaked so, you know, the fact that we’re not getting a lot of information that’s being leaked out there I think is serving to.

Is. Is. That’s a good thing. That’s a very good Thing. I think good, good things are happening. This, it’s in, in, in, in many respects. I think it’s one of those things is like, you know, no news is good news. And I, I just, I, you know, I don’t know what’s happening. I really don’t. I can’t, I can’t say. But my, My gut instinct is that we’re going, It’s. Is that things are going to be, Things are going to be good, but we’re going to have to go through a rough patch to get to the good.

So, and I’m, I’m, I think I’ve been pretty consistent with saying that. So I feel like the Federal Reserve System has to go. That is, el numero uno has to go. And when that goes, I, you know, the, I think what Trump is desperately trying to do right now is to keep the dollar as the reserve currency of the world, because if it isn’t, it’s going to make 1929 look like a day at the beach. Oh, yeah. And, and Ed, I never get bored talking about Constitution. He said it says. Well, I will say Ron and Doug may get bored talking about one amendment for prolonged periods.

No, never get bored. But the. He’s appreciating. He’s basically said he appreciates the information in the context. That’s what it’s all about. You need to have all the context to understand this stuff. This is the reason why I dig deep into this stuff. I study this stuff, and when I talk about it, I get into the context the best I can, because I don’t want you left with any questions. I want you to understand, I want you to know. But it’s about the end of the Fed. The debt clock booklet is about the end of the Fed.

Gotcha. Okay. And you’ve actually speculated that that may be why some of this stuff is happening the way it is. Yeah, because I would love to see the end of the Fed. Yeah, well, you know, I don’t know if the end of the, I don’t, I don’t know if the Fed is going to end in terms of. If it’s going to be a wholesale departure of the Federal Reserve, if that institution is going to close down, or if it’s going to be rolled into the treasury and it will still serve a purpose. I don’t know how that’s going to happen.

But the one thing that I do know, or one thing that I do absolutely believe is that the dollar in its existing form as a debt instrument has to go away because we cannot move forward, forward with this, with a, with a dollar that is a debt instrument. We have to move forward with a dollar that is backed by, by something tangible, whether it be gold, silver, or a hybrid of commodities or something. We have to move forward, you know, with something that is honest and, you know, and again, tangible. That’s my, that’s my belief. Your thoughts there, Mr.

Gibbs? I went to the US debt clock.org on the upper right hand corner it says Secret window. And then the declaration of we the People about how the Fed should end. And then it offers a free book PDF download. There you go. Here, I’m gonna go there now. I, I am going to then download that and then send it to my friend Alan Myers, who teaches monetary system education and has been talking in the Fed for a lot longer than anybody I know, including Mr. Ron Paul. And so we’ll see a declaration by we the people.

Free PDF download. Okay, let’s see. Okay, here it is. And this is the, the, the New Money revolution. Oh, man. Why did they, why do they got to do this to me when they do it like this? It just, it just, it makes it hokey. I don’t know. This, it just makes it, it’s not, it doesn’t. I don’t know, a picture or two are cool, but this just makes it look okie. Am I alone in thinking that, Doug? Yeah, you’re not alone. No, I agree. I mean, it’s, it’s, it’s, it’s not worth looking at 100. I’m not saying that the information is bad.

I’m just saying it’s like, it’s just presented in more of like a, like an elementary way. But anyway, I will check this out. I will absolutely check this out. So, guys, I had a, I had a. I, I, I guess I wasn’t really surprised. I had a, I had a cancellation from Mike, so. But I’m, that’s why we’re willing to go so late. Yeah, that’s why I’m going to go to. I’m probably going to do a show on my own to highlight the, the, My, my, the first substack that I put out, which was about. It’s actually, I’ll share this with you.

Find it where I put it. I have way too many windows open. Mel. Appreciate that. Keep those nuggets coming. Someone earlier also had said something about the, the nuggets I throw out there. I appreciate that. There’s quite a few nuggets somewhere in this noggin. Thank, thank you, Jack, for that. We are interested. We’ll take a look. Like I said. Oh, oh, you know what? Here. While I’m. Since, since we have, since we have some not, Not a ton of time, I, I. Let me play this real quick. Okay. This was. So this is something that I, I was just, I was playing around the other day and I said, give me a modern version of Yankee Doodle.

Like I want. Like, is there, like is there, is there a revolutionary era song that was like the, the prominent one? Like, you know, the. In the north and this and this and the Civil War, they had what battle him of the Republic and in the south they had Bonnie Blue Flag. But in the, in the south or in the, during the Revolution, the. They had Yankee Doodle. And there was some interesting things that I didn’t know about Yankee Doodle, but this is the. I, I actually went and I had this. I created this and let me, let me play.

Yankee Doodle went to town riding on a pony Stuck a feather in his cap and called it macaroni Yankee Doodle keep it up Yankee Doodle dandy Mind the music and the step and with the girls be handy Father and I went down to camp along with Captain Gooden and there we saw the men and boys as thick as tasty pudding Yankee Doodle keep it up Yankee Doodle Dandy Mind the music and the stepping with the girls be handy all right, well, so if that, if that song appeals to anybody and they want it, I’ll put a link in the, in the.

I’ll put a link. So. Well, someone else put a link in the chat. A real special ad. I’ve been doing some videos over Madison’s Notes with, With Warhamster. We did the fifth one this morning and. Oh, that’s the one he posted. I, I wanted to. Well, when I, When I went and did the. When I was looking up some of the information about this, I, I discovered that I didn’t realize this, but, but Yankee Doodle when the. Was a. The reason it was called Yankee Doodle was because it was a, it was essentially a slander. The, the.

The. The British army referred to the colonials as Yankee Doodles. And that was a, it was like a mock. It was. They. They were mocking them and what they did was, was Yankee do the. Was the, the. The colonials took that and they switched it around and turned it into like a battle, a battle cry. That’s what America does. There’s so many times in history we’ve seen that happen. Yeah. And when they did that. And you know the whole thing about macaroni. Okay, so macaroni is not what we think it is. Macaroni at the time was like, like people that were very well dressed and that, that’s why they put the feather in the hat.

And that was what they were, that’s what they mocked. That’s one of the things that they mocked was the feather in the hat. So it’s just interesting stuff. I just, I found a few things that were really interesting about, about July 4th. Oh, anyway, anyway, I went to a ball game on Independence Day up in Medford, about two and a half hour drive away. Our team, the Medford Rogues won. Oh, that’s right. Fireworks. Stayed the night. Yeah, it was a lot of fun. Yeah. And what’s funny is one of my, one of the listeners, viewers from a show I do on Sunday nights with Alan called For the Republic.

Turns out they’re Medford. So I’m going to be up in the Grants Pass a week from now to have my car in the shop. And so I’m gonna have lunch. We’re gonna have lunch, get together. Well, late lunch, early dinner with this viewer slash listener in Medford. Any of you guys in Southern Oregon, you know, feel free to get a hold of me. Constitutions speaker, yahoo.com. i’d love to get together with you. Ed and Mel got a chance, we got a chance to get together. I, we, we were like three hours man talking in Canton, Ohio.

It was great. I enjoyed that. But yeah, I’m always happy to get together with people. Mel asked, what did, what did macaroni mean? As in the 1700s, macaroni didn’t just refer to pasta. It was a British slang term and it meant something very specific. A macaroni was a fashionable young man who dressed in an exaggerated, flamboyant, almost effeminate European style. The term came from wealthy British men who had traveled to Italy on the Grand Tour, a kind of fishing school for aristocrats. When they returned to England, they showed off their continental taste in food like pasta, fashion and culture.

And those guys wore elaborate powder wigs, embellished coats, tight breeches and decorative swords and silky accessories. So they were referred, they were, they were kind of seen as over the top. So the British slang went, stuck a feather in his cap and called it macaroni. So that’s where that came from. It’s not a. Because I was like, what the heck does that mean? But anyway, interesting stuff. I always like those little tidbits, that useless information. Yeah. Every once in a while those are fun to have. My favorite still is that there’s a misspelling on the Declaration of Independence.

Really? Yeah. And every year when I do my event down Independence hall there in, In Buena park, the question. I asked the question, what is this misspelling? And whoever gets it right gets one of my books. And. But so anybody know what the misspelling is on the Declaration of Independence? And it’s. It. It’s at the very, very bottom of the. Of the document where they signed it. If you find John Hancock signature, go directly to the bottom below it. There’s a guy named Carter Braxton. Carter Braxton signed it Carter, then Braxton. But what he dipped his pen for Carter, dipped it again for Braxton, then came back to cross the T and Braxton and cross the T.

And Carter. Well, he was out of ink by the time he crossed the T and Carter. He slightly looped that te so it looks like it says Carter Braxton. Interesting, this more useless information. Yeah, well, it. I. And the person who told me about it, I’m like, no kidding, man. I pull it out and sure enough, there it is. But yeah, you know, it’s. It’s funny. The, uh. I would love to see Ron on Historical Jeopardy. Says, yeah, but. Yeah, Jeopardy’s fun while you’re sitting on the couch. I, I usually beat everybody on the show, but when you’re under the lights and the camera.

Oh, it’s. It’s. Yeah, it’s unnerving. You know, I, I don’t know if I ever told you this, but when we were. When. When we were on. On Westpac on the, on the Peleliu, they. The captain wanted to do something that was kind of fun, so he did what they called on. It was a. It was a variation of Jeopardy. So he had two teams of, of three indivi. Three. Three people from, from your division. And we would go against each other head to head. You told me about this, but go ahead. Yeah. And. Well, we. I.

I was OA Division, which. It was me and my, My. So my, My cat or the, The. The. The guy who’s lieutenant or captain in the. In the army or the Marines. Same rank.03. He. He was in charge of our division. And then the, Our. My first class petty officer and me. And I, you know, I was. I was young, but I wasn’t stupid. And I was. I was still pretty smart. I was young and stupid. So. Yeah, go ahead. But. But the point. The point of the matter is, is that we won The. We won the entire thing.

And the last thing, the last one was actually refereed by the captain and it was put on the ship CCTV for the whole crew to see. Right. And I, I re, I recorded, I recorded it and then we did it again. There was. They got through that. We got like a 500 first prize and we used that money when we got to, when we got to, to Hong Kong, we used it and we went out to this big fancy restaurant in Hong Kong and we had dinner paid for us. You know, it was kind of cool.

Well, then they did it again and we won every. We lost in the final. We lost in the final and. But we were the only. That was the only loss that we ever took. And. But yeah, we won. We were undefeated almost the entire time. But even though I wound up being a personnelman on my first ship, I basically was with deck semen, did underway watches, all that jazz. And we would just have these massive four board risk games. Oh, nice. So we had like four risk boards. Man, that was like a mess load of us all playing.

It was, it was a lot of fun. That’s. That’s a lot of fun. That’s a lot of fun. Yeah, you know, I, and I was, I told you, I think I told you I was the ship’s weatherman. Right. Like they, they would do the. Yeah, so I had my, that was like my first rule, you know, on video type thing. So. But anyway, long, long ago. Many, many, many years. Many pounds. Long time ago in a body that I don’t have anymore. Yeah, exactly. I tell people when I graduated high school, I was 115. I’m. I’m 227.

So there’s two of me. Exactly. Now, Right, Exactly. Yeah, I’m not quite that bad, but it’s not, I’m not, it’s not too far off. So. But yeah, anyway. All right, well, I enjoyed the time chat room. Thanks for being here and hanging out when we even stopped talking about the Second Amendment. Started chatting but appreciate you guys. Don’t forget DouglasVgibs.com is right there on the screen. We are. So I am excited because last Wednesday and Thursday I got a chance to premiere on Zacky Radio Zakiradio.com the America American Media. America media. See, America matters media. That’s what it is.

America matters media. Conservative. So on Wednesdays it’s the. The main radio station is in Reno, Nevada but there’s a network of stations. So I’m on with the war hamster on Wednesdays at 11am Pacific and then my own solo show On Thursday. Excuse me. On Thursdays 11am Pacific Zackyradio.com or just watch on DouglasVgibs.com I’ll be putting out information about it there. So. Awesome. Well guys, I, since Mike’s not going to be here, I am going to go ahead and I’ve got to set the show up to do and I’ll just, I’m going to, I’m going to go through my first sub stack that I put out there which is about, it’s basically about the, how the, how the Great Depression was manufactured and it.

All the programs that FDR did to enslave the white, white Americans and bring my wife over. She’s got to see the baby kitty. And then the, and then, and then the. Oh, they’re so cute. Let me see the face. She wants to see a little face. Oh my goodness. She loves cats. How old is the kitten? It’s six weeks. Six weeks. So cute. So, so anyway, it’s about, it’s, it’s, it’s, it’s, it’s a, it’s pure Bengal. That’s so cute. It’s a pure Bengal. So the, that was Mrs. Constitution. My wife. If you’re wondering who that was, folks.

So the, so the substack is basically about how the, the, the, the New Deal enslaved white America and then the, the Civil Rights act enslaved black America. So with. Anyway, I’ll, that’s, that’s basically what, that’s basically what the, what the articles is going to be about. Have fun. Oh, and yes, the kitten is cute. Even though I’m a dog person. Oh, what. How can you not. How can anybody say a kitten isn’t cute? I just don’t understand. Well, see, the problem with kittens, those, they become cats. They become cats. Exactly. I know that I knew you, I knew you were going with that.

They grow up. Yeah, but see my, my doggies, even though they’re fully grown, 8 and 9 years old, they’re still like puppies, right? 100. I get it. But I had a matter of fact someone mentioned German shepherd in the chat and I had a German shepherd as a kid and German shepherds are awesome. German shepherds are, are very, they’re, they’re good dogs. 100%. 100%. When I was in elementary school, it was a poodle. But my middle school and high school years, it was a German shepherd and that dog was awesome. And I also had a pet rabbit.

And you’ve never had fun, a lot of fun until you saw a rabbit and a German shepherd become friends and play with each other. That was fun. Yeah. Anyway. Absolutely. All right. Gotta go, brother. Hey, enjoy your evening, sir. And, guys, I’ll be back here in I’m probably about 10 minutes. I gott set the thing up and hit the head, and then I’ll be right back, so. All right, guys, we’ll. We’ll see you here shortly. Ciao.
[tr:tra].